2026 (1) TMI 251

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are that on 18.07.2012 a search was conducted at Nuwal Group, Jaipur of which the assessee-respondent (hereinafter 'respondent') was a member. In pursuance to the search, proceedings were initiated and the respondent filed return declaring income of Rs.15,04,61,890/-. The return was accepted, assessment was finalized on 13.03.2015 and satisfaction for initiating the penalty proceedings under Section 271AAB was recorded in assessment order. Penalty was imposed vide order dated 20.08.2015. During the pendency of the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (hereinafter 'CIT'), the petitioner applied under the amnesty scheme and was issued certificate under the Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016 (for short 'the scheme'). ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the I.T. Act, 1961 which was initiated as he penalty order was found to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue? iv) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT was justified in quashing the order passed u/s 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the verdict passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd., Vs. CIT (2000) 243 ITR 831 that held that incorrect assumption of fact or an incorrect application of law would satisfy the requirement of the order being erroneous. An order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice or without application of mind, would be an order falling in this category.?" 4. Learned counsel for the revenue submits ....